These texts were written for SubjectNest. All people, organisations, prices and model objects are fictional. Print, project, read aloud or provide as selectable text. The teacher should preview language and offer a private route for learners who do not want to read aloud. The texts support selected Year 7 English content descriptions; they do not replace the wider Australian and world literature required across the year.
Text A — The seventh shape (narrative)
Mira's group had six paper leaf shapes and ten minutes to make a sorting key. Nobody needed to know the name of a real plant. These were models: crisp black outlines cut from recycled card.
“Smooth edge or jagged edge?” asked Dev. He wrote the first question in thick marker. Their first six cards slipped through the key neatly. Mira tested each answer twice. By the time the bell sounded, the arrows on their page looked as tidy as a map.
The next day, Ms Tan put a seventh shape on the table. It had one smooth side and one jagged side.
“Easy,” said Dev. “Jagged.” He pushed it down that branch. Mira paused. If she turned the card, the smooth side was just as obvious. Their question had sounded precise, but it had never said whether both edges had to match.
They tried the key again. Two groups reached different endings with the same card. Dev looked at the thick black arrows, then at the shape. “Our map needs another route.”
Mira wrote a note under the first question: Look at the whole outer edge. If it has any jagged section, choose jagged. Now both groups arrived at the same ending. The seventh shape still did not match one of their six labels. That was useful information too.
Before they handed the key in, Mira added one more line: This key sorts our six model cards. A new card may need a new branch.
Teacher reading moves
- The narrator is third person. Inference: Mira values a rule that another person can use reliably; the pause, retest and final note support this. Dev changes his view when the same card yields two outcomes. More than one defensible opinion is possible if anchored in words from the text.
- Narrative structure: setup, successful first test, complication, revision, qualified ending. The key is a motif for a tool that can be checked and changed, not proof that the model cards represent real species.
- Discussion prompt: “Where did a small change in wording change the result?” Accept the revised rule and explain its limit: the seventh shape still needs a destination.
Text B — What a two-choice key can and cannot do (explanation)
A two-choice key is a sequence of paired questions. Each answer sends the user to another question or to a label. A useful question names an observable feature: for example, “Does the outline include a jagged section?” A vague question such as “Does it look unusual?” may send two users in different directions.
Start with the same view of every card. Record a rule for features that mix two categories. Test each route with every model card, then ask another person to follow the key without hints. If the other person reaches a different label, inspect the question before blaming the user. The mismatch is evidence that the wording or model may need revision.
A key identifies items within the set and features for which it was built. It does not, by itself, show how living organisms are related through evolution. A paper shape is a simple model, not a botanical specimen. When a new item does not fit, record it as unmatched and revise the key or its scope. Avoid forcing an answer merely because every printed arrow ends somewhere.
Teacher reading moves
- Purpose is to explain a method and its limit. Its sequence uses imperatives (“Start”, “Record”, “Test”), conditional reasoning and a concluding qualification.
- Specialist sense of key: an identification tool; everyday sense: an object that opens a lock. Branch can mean a route in a decision diagram or part of a tree. Feature is an observed property, not a judgement of worth.
Fictional club decision brief (shared with integrated Week 2)
A fictional school's Friday club has one 35-minute activity slot and $60 in discretionary supplies money for that slot. The accessible room, staff supervision and required safety equipment are already provided; they are not optional choices. The club can run one of these mutually exclusive activities this Friday. Quotes and interest counts are invented practice data, not real purchasing advice.
| Option | Fictional supply quote | Possible benefit | Limit or missing evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| A: repair and play tabletop games | $45 | students can reuse repaired games | tool suitability and actual repair needs must be checked |
| B: observe model specimens with reusable magnifiers | $50 | closer observation of classroom models | check that all learners can use or direct an alternative view |
| C: make a shared paper mural | $35 | a visible collaborative product | confirm the class has display permission and suitable materials |
In a fictional quick poll, 12 learners chose A, 10 chose B and 8 chose C. Thirty responses are not a whole-school preference measure. A vote alone does not settle accessibility, learning value or what resources are already available. No one should spend money or collect real student preferences for this exercise.
Text C — A position for repair and play (fictional student council note)
I recommend Option A. The $45 quote fits the $60 limit and would leave $15 unspent. Repaired games could be used again, although we have not checked which games actually need repair. The quick poll gives A the largest count: 12 of 30 responses. That is useful, but it is a small, self-selected group. Before deciding, I would ask the club which games need work and whether everyone can participate in the activity. If A is chosen, the best forgone option depends on our ranking; for me, B is next because observing models could also support future sessions.
Text D — A position for observing models (fictional student council note)
I recommend Option B. The $50 quote fits the limit and reusable magnifiers could help us notice details in our model specimens. The poll favours A by two responses, but it did not ask why people chose. B may have a stronger learning benefit if learners can use a magnifier or direct a partner to describe the model. I would check that access route first. My next-best choice is A, because repairs might give games a longer life. Choosing B means giving up that repair benefit this Friday, even though the cash difference is only $5. We should not call the $50 price alone the opportunity cost.
Teacher evidence moves
Ask learners to separate: a claim (choose A/B), quoted evidence ($45/$50, 12/10), qualification (poll limits, access checks), and missing information. Both positions use the same source differently. The opportunity cost is the benefit of the next-best feasible option for the decision-maker's stated ranking, not simply the money spent or all unchosen options added together.
Vocabulary and accessible formats
| Word | Everyday sense | Working specialist sense here |
|---|---|---|
| key | something that opens a lock | paired decisions used to identify items in a defined set |
| branch | part of a tree | one route after a decision |
| feature | noticeable part | defined, observable property |
| evidence | support for a claim | observation, wording or data that can be checked |
| classification | putting things into groups | grouping by stated shared features |
| opportunity cost | not usually an everyday phrase | benefit of the next-best choice given up when one option is selected |
Provide copies in selectable text, large print or audio read by a local adult; no recorded narration is supplied. Let learners annotate with colour, underline, a tactile marker, typed note or spoken/AAC description. Colour never carries the only distinction. Offer vocabulary before reading without requiring students to disclose a home language; translations need qualified local review before use.